Titans Jousting for the Mob: Great Powers and Voting in the UN General Assembly
https://doi.org/10.46272/2587-8476-2018-0-2-7-18
Abstract
The article aims to assess current trends in the evolution of Russian,
Chinese and American standing in the UN General Assembly (UNGA). This body as the
most representative international body with wide thematical mandate enables to assess
correlation in voting patterns of major powers and other participants of international
community. Therefore, commonality of positions could be used as an indicator of
positive recognition of national policy by UN Member-States. Such recognition could
become a source of international legitimation for a strategy of a major power in global
politics. The article starts with representing the key trend towards greater rivalry among
major powers since the early 2010s. It claims that this competition to a large extent
is exercised in institutionalized forums. It then examines an institutional mandate and
operational dynamics of UNGA. After that it engages in descriptive statistical analysis
of voting record in this body from its 60th to 71st sessions.
The study demonstrates the rise of unfavorable trends for Russia and China in UNGA.
Their positions receive lower levels of overall support from the whole population of
UN Member-States. The same trends could be observed within BRICS and among
their respective regional partners. The United States, on the contrary, improved their
positions in the UNGA throughout the 2010s. This task was simplified by an extremely
low base level of correlation in voting between Washington and other states. The
administration of Barack Obama was especially successful in consolidation of major
developed countries around the United States. However, due to the widespread
skepticism towards the UN in the American political elite, there are no guarantees that
the United States will be able to preserve increased level of convergence of political
positions with other states in future.
About the Author
I. Istomin
MGIMO University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ph.D. (Political Science), associate professor
Department of Applied International Political Analysis
References
1. Bogaturov A. D. Mezhdunarodnyj poryadok v nastupivshem veke [International Order in the New Century].Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy. 2003. No. 1. P. 6–23.
2. Istomin I. A. Pereraspredelenie potentsialov SSHA i ikh soyuznikov I ego politicheskie posledstviya [Changing Balance of Capabilities Between Western Major Powers and Its Effect on Their Alliances]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 25: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya i mirovaya politika. 2017. Vol. 9. No. 2. P. 3–36.
3. Shakleina T. A. Velikie derzhvy i regional’nye podsistemy [Great Powers and Regional Subsystems]. Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy. 2011. Vol. 9. No. 26. P. 29–39.
4. Brooks S. G., Wohlforth W. C. Hard Times for Soft Balancing. International Security. 2005. Vol. 30. No. 1. P. 72–108.
5. Dreher A., Nunnenkamp P., Thiele R. Does US Aid Buy UN General Assembly Votes? A Disaggregated Analysis.Public Choice. 2008. Vol. 136. No. 1–2. P. 139–164.
6. Dreher A., Sturm J. E., Vreeland J. R. Global Horse Trading: IMF Loans for Votes in the United Nations Security Council. European Economic Review. 2009. Vol. 53. No. 7. P. 742–757.
7. Drezner D. The Tragedy of the Global Institutional Commons.In: Back to basics: state power in a contemporary world / Ed. by M. Finnemore, J. Goldstein. – N. Y.: Oxford University Press, 2013. P. 280–311.
8. Keohane R. O. After hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984. 290 p.
9. Kim S. Y., Russett B. The New Politics of Voting Alignments in the United Nations General Assembly. International Organization. 1996. Vol. 50. No. 4. P. 629–652.
10. Layne C. This time it’s real: The End of Unipolarity and the Pax Americana. International Studies Quarterly. 2012.Vol. 56. No. 1. P. 203–213.
11. Mearsheimer J. J. The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security. 1994. Vol. 19. No. 3. P. 5–49.
12. Mearsheimer J. J. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. – N. Y.: WW Norton & Company, 2001. 555 p.
13. Newnham R. “Coalition of the Bribed and Bullied?” US Economic Linkage and the Iraq War Coalition. International Studies Perspectives. 2008. Vol. 9. No. 2. P. 183–200.
14. Peterson M. J. The UN General Assembly. Oxon: Routledge, 2006. 160 p.
15. Puchala D., Laatikainen K. V., Coate R. United Nations Politics: International Organization in a Divided World. Oxon:Routledge, 2015. 246 p.
16. Voeten E. Clashes in the Assembly. International Organization.2000. Vol. 54. No. 2. P. 185–215.
17. Waltz K. N.Theory of International Politics.Boston: McGraw Hill, 1979. 251 p.
Review
For citations:
Istomin I. Titans Jousting for the Mob: Great Powers and Voting in the UN General Assembly. Journal of International Analytics. 2018;(2):7-18. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.46272/2587-8476-2018-0-2-7-18
Views:
964
Email this article 